INSPEC08541 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

III. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations made during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement actions taken during the inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. Page 1/2 Deserado C-81-018 28 Oct 2004 This was a partial inspection of the Deserado Mine conducted by Jim Stark of CDMG. Scott Wanstedt of BME accompanied me on the inspection. The mine was actively producing coal at the time of the inspection. The weather was cool and raining and the ground was (obviously) wet. Scott indicated that it had been raining pretty consistently for the last several days (since the weekend). Signs and Markers: All of the necessary signs (including the mine ID signs, permit boundary signs, refuse pile ID signs, subsoil stockpile signs and topsoil stockpile signs) were properly displayed and in good condition. Roads: The access road to the mine site is a paved road. The road was well maintained and in good condition. -The haul road to the refuse piles (RP-1, RP-2/3/4 and RP-5a) was wet and muddy but it was well maintained and in good condition. The road appeared stable and there were no signs of erosional problems. -The conveyor corridor road was wet and muddy but is was well maintained and stable. There were no erosional problems noted with the road. Hydrologic Balance: -Pond RP-1 was wet at the bottom at the time of the inspection. The pond embankment was well vegetated and there were no erosional problems noted. There was little to no run-off from refuse pile RP-1 and the surrounding areas into the pond. - Pond RP-2/3 contained water approximately five feet below the discharge pipe at the time of the inspection. Both of the cells at the pond inlet were full, with water flowing into the main part of the pond. The pond embankment was well vegetated and appeared to be stable. There were no erosional problems noted on the pond embankment. - Pond SS-1 contained water at the time of the inspection but was not discharging. The pond embankment was well vegetated and appeared to be stable. There were no erosional problems noted on the pond embankment. - Pond SS-2 was wet at the bottom at the time of the inspection. The pond embankment was well vegetated and appeared to be stable. There were no erosional problems noted on the pond embankment. - Pond DP-1 contained water at a level approximately six inches below the discharge pipe. The pond was discharging from the small weep-hole in the primary discharge pipe. The pond embankment was well vegetated and appeared to be stable. There were no erosional problems on the pond embankment. The emergency spillway was well maintained and stable.